Unwilling to renounce medical marijuana, House calls for more study

After several minutes of debate, the AOA House of Delegates declined to approve or reject a resolution opposing the medical use of marijuana pending clear scientific evidence of its benefits. Instead, the House narrowly voted on July 17 to refer the resolution for further study to the AOA Bureau of Scientific Affairs and Public Health.

Some participants in the discussion, on both sides of the issue, came from the 14 states that have approved the use of marijuana for patients with chronic diseases.

Speaking in support of the referral, Michael A. Seffinger, DO, of California, reasoned that the policy could derail the scientific and social progress of medical marijuana already under way in his state.

“In California, we have a lot of effort going on in terms of studying marijuana,” said Dr. Seffinger, the chairman of the Neuromusculoskeletal Medicine and Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine Department at the Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific in Pomona, Calif. “At our school, Western University, we have several basic scientists researching this, with great results. We also have people using it, and the state supports it as well. So it would be a problem if the AOA came out against it.”

Other speakers, though, still see a paucity of evidence supporting marijuana’s medical benefits. “We in Michigan do have a law for medical marijuana use,” said Edward J. Canfield, DO, a trustee of the Michigan Osteopathic Association. “We still don’t feel like there is enough evidence to indicate that this is a quality for people to be doing. And I don’t think it hurts for us at the AOA level to have policy that says there’s not good information on it.”

Call for more science

The resolution as originally submitted by the Michigan Osteopathic Association stressed the need for guidelines—for both physicians and patients with chronic disease—on the appropriate and safe use of marijuana. It also called on the AOA to advocate for research into the efficacy of medical marijuana, including encouraging the National Institutes of Health to undertake “well-designed clinical research.”

During its deliberations on the measure, the House Committee on Public Affairs struck the request for guidelines, substituting a strong call for added science. Further amending the resolution, the committee wrote that the AOA “cannot support the medical use of marijuana until scientific evidence clearly demonstrates results equivalent to other therapeutic agents approved by the [U.S.] Food and Drug Administration.”

George J. Pasquarello, DO, of Rhode Island initiated the House motion to refer the resolution, saying that the policy would “impact” DOs like him who practice in the 14 states that have legalized medical marijuana. Voting electronically after a voice vote was too close too call, the House agreed.